IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution : 14.12.2018 Date of Reserving the order: 10.03.2025 Date of Decision: 29.04.2025 CC No. 1596/2018 IN THE MATTER OF Sh. Arpan Kumar S/o Sh. Raj Kumar R/o 254/4C, Railway Officers Flat, Panchkula Road, Opp. Central Railway Hospital, Connaught Place, New Delhi (Through: Mr. Desh Raj, Advocate)

..…Complainant VERSUS

1. M/s BPTP Ltd.

Registered Office at: M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001

2. Mr. Kabul Chawla (CMD)

3. Mr. Sudhanshu Tripathi (Director)

4. Mr. Anupam Bansal (Director)

5. Mr. Bhupender Singh Lamba (Director)

6. Mr. Rakesh Narang (Director)

(Through: Mr. Mohit Yadav, Advocate)

..…Opposite Parties CORAM:

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, PRESIDING MEMBER Present: Mr. Desh Raj, counsel for the Complainant Mr. Mohit Yadav, counsel for the Opposite Party.

PER: HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, PRESIDING MEMBER

JUDGMENT

1. The C omplainant, initially filed the complaint no. 742/2014 before the District Consumer Forum (New Delhi). Later on, the complaint was returned to Complainant by Ld District Forum vide order dated 13.09.2018 for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. Thereafter, the Complainant filed the complaint before this Commission on 14.12.2018.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Complainant came across of the upcoming housing scheme of the Opposite Parties, namely, ‘Park Generation’ at Sector-37D, Gurgaon. Since, the Complainant was in need of house, he approached the officials of the Opposite Parties to get himself registered for the scheme, wherein the officials of Opposite Parties stated that the scheme was going to be launched within six months and further convinced the Complainant to deposit the booking amount before pre-launching of the scheme. Thus, the Complainant deposited the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with the Opposite Parties vide receipt bearing no. 2011/1400020891 dated

13.09.2011.

3. It is the case of Complainant that at the time of depositing the amount, the Opposite Parties assured him that whenever the scheme will be launched, he would be intimated accordingly. Thereafter, time and again, he enquired from the Opposite Parties about the launch of scheme. In response, the Opposite Parties always assured that whenever the scheme would be launched, he would definitely get unit. However, in January 2013, he came to know through internet that the scheme had already been launched. Thus, he sent emails to Opposite Parties on 26.01.2013 & 31.01.2013 and 26.02.2014 and also made various telephonic calls. Then, the Opposite Parties told him that the unit was cancelled as the Complainant did not deposit the requisite money. He asked the Opposite Parties to show proof of correspondence at which the intimation was given by Opposite Parties to deposit the amount. On receiving the same, he transpired that address and e-mail mentioned in the correspondence were not pertaining to him.

4. It is the further case of Complainant that the Opposite Parties utilized his hard-earned money. When the value of units was increased, the Opposite Parties played mischief with him by not intimating him about the scheme. The act and conduct of Opposite Parties by not allotting the unit and not refunding the amount amounts to criminal breach of trust, cheating and misappropriation of funds and deficiency in service. Since, he was aggrieved by conduct of Opposite Parties, he lodged the complaint dated 19.08.2014 against the Opposite Parties with SHO, Police Station, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Further, he also issued legal notice dated 22.07.2014 to Opposite Parties and sought allotment of unit as assured or in alternative refund his entire money along with interest @ 36% p.a. But, the Opposite Parties failed to do so.

5. Thus, the Complainant was left with no other option but to file the complaint against the Opposite Parties before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties.

6. After the complaint was filed be